|
In the US media there exists 2 types of people, those who hate gays and those who hate those who hate gays. In reality there exists a 3rd category which comprises the vast majority of the population which is those who dont give a goddamn shit.
If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash.
If you are talking about gay rights such as marriage benefits then you are talking about social engineering which is a separate issue from gay discrimination.
|
On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:
In the US media there exists 2 types of people, those who hate gays and those who hate those who hate gays. In reality there exists a 3rd category which comprises the vast majority of the population which is those who dont give a goddamn shit.
If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash.
If you are talking about gay rights such as marriage benefits then you are talking about social engineering which is a separate issue from gay discrimination.
If you as a minority "stfu" as you put it, no one will ever know about you, wich in turn no one will ever get to understand you or the situation and in turn be able to accept the term of some one being Gay.
This must be one of the most stupid things i have read in a long time.
|
On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash.
Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk.
They just need to shut up and everything will be ok.
|
Northern Ireland27054 Posts
On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:
In the US media there exists 2 types of people, those who hate gays and those who hate those who hate gays. In reality there exists a 3rd category which comprises the vast majority of the population which is those who dont give a goddamn shit.
If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash.
If you are talking about gay rights such as marriage benefits then you are talking about social engineering which is a separate issue from gay discrimination.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
|
On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok.
The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so.
Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure.
|
On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying. Show nested quote +
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure.
According to whom is that a fact?
|
On August 06 2013 15:24 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure. According to whom is that a fact?
Most sociologists? Marriage between a man and woman has numerous tax benefits along with other benefits in insurance etc.
There is a marked difference between western gay rights demands and other gay rights demands. In the west, the demand is that gays be eligible for marriage and other benefits. In other cultures there is the demand that gays not be beaten and executed or otherwise completely and utterly ostracized from the community. While both are different levels of discrimination, there is assuredly a difference between the two. At the very least, both come from traditional standards of social values. In the west, it is almost solely an argument over who should and should not receive financial and social benefits.
|
On August 06 2013 15:32 Mallard86 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 15:24 farvacola wrote:On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure. According to whom is that a fact? Most sociologists? Marriage between a man and woman has numerous tax benefits along with other benefits in insurance etc. There is a marked difference between western gay rights demands and other gay rights demands. In the west, the demand is that gays be eligible for marriage and other benefits. In other cultures there is the demand that gays not be beaten and executed or otherwise completely and utterly ostracized from the community. While both are different levels of discrimination, there is assuredly a difference between the two. At the very least, both come from traditional standards of social values. In the west, it is almost solely an argument over who should and should not receive financial and social benefits.
Who are these sociologists that say that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so.
|
On August 06 2013 15:34 farvacola wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 15:32 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:24 farvacola wrote:On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure. According to whom is that a fact? Most sociologists? Marriage between a man and woman has numerous tax benefits along with other benefits in insurance etc. There is a marked difference between western gay rights demands and other gay rights demands. In the west, the demand is that gays be eligible for marriage and other benefits. In other cultures there is the demand that gays not be beaten and executed or otherwise completely and utterly ostracized from the community. While both are different levels of discrimination, there is assuredly a difference between the two. At the very least, both come from traditional standards of social values. In the west, it is almost solely an argument over who should and should not receive financial and social benefits. Who are these sociologists that say that "gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so."?
Its a pretty assumed extrapolation (if not explicitly stated extrapolation).
Marriage gains multiple benefits from tax write offs to living expense write offs and reductions to shared benefits. This is an inarguable product of social engineering by the government ie, marrying and starting a family then raising kids jointly is rewarded with multiple benefits.
Gay rights has focused on receiving equal benefits to heterosexual marriage benefits over the last couple decades. This is focused on "marriage" but also branches into other areas. How many articles have you read about some gay partner who is ineligible for their significant other's benefits because they are of the same sex whereas they would be fine if they were of the opposite sex?
|
On August 06 2013 15:32 Mallard86 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 15:24 farvacola wrote:On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure. According to whom is that a fact? Most sociologists? Marriage between a man and woman has numerous tax benefits along with other benefits in insurance etc. There is a marked difference between western gay rights demands and other gay rights demands. In the west, the demand is that gays be eligible for marriage and other benefits. In other cultures there is the demand that gays not be beaten and executed or otherwise completely and utterly ostracized from the community. While both are different levels of discrimination, there is assuredly a difference between the two. At the very least, both come from traditional standards of social values. In the west, it is almost solely an argument over who should and should not receive financial and social benefits.
Hes probably wondering who says this is a fact: "..The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer ..."
It's kind of strange because surely some people still support gay rights due to wanting a more normal and non-discriminated lifestyle when stuff like this: http://www.krqe.com/dpp/features/gay-couple-forced-to-back-of-bus clearly still happens to people.
|
On August 06 2013 15:45 FallDownMarigold wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 15:32 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:24 farvacola wrote:On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure. According to whom is that a fact? Most sociologists? Marriage between a man and woman has numerous tax benefits along with other benefits in insurance etc. There is a marked difference between western gay rights demands and other gay rights demands. In the west, the demand is that gays be eligible for marriage and other benefits. In other cultures there is the demand that gays not be beaten and executed or otherwise completely and utterly ostracized from the community. While both are different levels of discrimination, there is assuredly a difference between the two. At the very least, both come from traditional standards of social values. In the west, it is almost solely an argument over who should and should not receive financial and social benefits. Hes probably wondering who says this is a fact: "..The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer ..." It's kind of strange because surely some people still support gay rights due to wanting a more normal and non-discriminated lifestyle when stuff like this: http://www.khou.com/news/national/218451091.html clearly still happens to people.
There are parts of the country where illegal segregation occurs. You can site all sorts of examples of bigotry towards multiple groups in isolated events but the reality is that gay rights in the main stream is more or less accepted.
|
On August 06 2013 15:51 Mallard86 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 15:45 FallDownMarigold wrote:On August 06 2013 15:32 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:24 farvacola wrote:On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure. According to whom is that a fact? Most sociologists? Marriage between a man and woman has numerous tax benefits along with other benefits in insurance etc. There is a marked difference between western gay rights demands and other gay rights demands. In the west, the demand is that gays be eligible for marriage and other benefits. In other cultures there is the demand that gays not be beaten and executed or otherwise completely and utterly ostracized from the community. While both are different levels of discrimination, there is assuredly a difference between the two. At the very least, both come from traditional standards of social values. In the west, it is almost solely an argument over who should and should not receive financial and social benefits. Hes probably wondering who says this is a fact: "..The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer ..." It's kind of strange because surely some people still support gay rights due to wanting a more normal and non-discriminated lifestyle when stuff like this: http://www.khou.com/news/national/218451091.html clearly still happens to people. There are parts of the country where illegal segregation occurs.
Yes, and the aim is to reduce occurrences of it, mainly involving education of ignorant people
|
On August 06 2013 16:00 FallDownMarigold wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 15:51 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:45 FallDownMarigold wrote:On August 06 2013 15:32 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:24 farvacola wrote:On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure. According to whom is that a fact? Most sociologists? Marriage between a man and woman has numerous tax benefits along with other benefits in insurance etc. There is a marked difference between western gay rights demands and other gay rights demands. In the west, the demand is that gays be eligible for marriage and other benefits. In other cultures there is the demand that gays not be beaten and executed or otherwise completely and utterly ostracized from the community. While both are different levels of discrimination, there is assuredly a difference between the two. At the very least, both come from traditional standards of social values. In the west, it is almost solely an argument over who should and should not receive financial and social benefits. Hes probably wondering who says this is a fact: "..The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer ..." It's kind of strange because surely some people still support gay rights due to wanting a more normal and non-discriminated lifestyle when stuff like this: http://www.khou.com/news/national/218451091.html clearly still happens to people. There are parts of the country where illegal segregation occurs. Yes, and the aim is to reduce occurrences of it, mainly involving education of ignorant people
Thats nice but it is unrelated to the discussion of social engineering and the demands of the benefits of such by same sex couples.
|
I'm pretty sure this is off topic, but I swear just tonight I dreamed Vladimir Putin made me Croque-monsieur and some vegetables to go with that. :/
I just can't not share that in this thread. I don't think I'll get into an actual discussion here because of how touchy this discussion is. Also consider that this is Russia we're talking about, most of you don't live in Russia. Are we really allowed to judge another country's stance on things? It's their culture, it's up to them. If they don't want to allow young minds to understand homosexuality it's up to them, however out-lawing something will only really make it more mysterious/interesting so it'll end up backfiring on them probably.
I really think homosexuals should be given the same rights as a straight couple and bam, move on to something else. It's so easy to create drama when there are other things that need to be examined.
|
Northern Ireland27054 Posts
On August 06 2013 16:12 Mallard86 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 16:00 FallDownMarigold wrote:On August 06 2013 15:51 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:45 FallDownMarigold wrote:On August 06 2013 15:32 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:24 farvacola wrote:On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure. According to whom is that a fact? Most sociologists? Marriage between a man and woman has numerous tax benefits along with other benefits in insurance etc. There is a marked difference between western gay rights demands and other gay rights demands. In the west, the demand is that gays be eligible for marriage and other benefits. In other cultures there is the demand that gays not be beaten and executed or otherwise completely and utterly ostracized from the community. While both are different levels of discrimination, there is assuredly a difference between the two. At the very least, both come from traditional standards of social values. In the west, it is almost solely an argument over who should and should not receive financial and social benefits. Hes probably wondering who says this is a fact: "..The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer ..." It's kind of strange because surely some people still support gay rights due to wanting a more normal and non-discriminated lifestyle when stuff like this: http://www.khou.com/news/national/218451091.html clearly still happens to people. There are parts of the country where illegal segregation occurs. Yes, and the aim is to reduce occurrences of it, mainly involving education of ignorant people Thats nice but it is unrelated to the discussion of social engineering and the demands of the benefits of such by same sex couples.
What social engineering? They want to access the same benefits that married couples do out of the principle of having genuine equality and not just being paid lip service to that effect. That's not what most people associate with the term.
|
I think boycotting the Olympics for this won't do any good. But maybe the gay athletes can do a bit of civil disobedience when they are done competing. Would be interesting to see if Russia would actually arrest athletes during the Olympics.
|
The isue that some people have with gay-pride and such i think is that they are verry vocal, wich some people see as attention seeking. Like the dramatic "coming out of the closet".
Manny elements of the gay movement are verry extravert and some are a bit overdramatic.
Some people have the feeling that it are gays themselves who make beeing gay a huge isue. I think it is true it can be devided in 3 categorys like another poster on this or previous page said,and that the majority does not realy give a shit.
I had a few friends ,guys and girls, coming out and telling they where gay and we just shrugged and said "ok cool" and everyone moved on and was happy. If people keep making an isue about it every day though it will get a bit annoying for some people and i think this is what some people in this thread bothers about the gay movement.
They dont see gays as beeing extremely discriminated as they do have the same rights as other people and are threated as equal by a big majority of the population in nearly all western countries. Black people,women and specially muslims are way bigger groups and probably more discriminated against then gays.
Am not saying that gays should not make an isue about getting equall rights, they fully deserve to be threated as every other person, but all i am saying is that for some people it sometimes is to much and that they dont want to hear about it annymore.
Well, hope i didnt offend annyone with this,am just trying to make both sides understand eachoter a bit better.
|
On August 06 2013 16:52 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 16:12 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 16:00 FallDownMarigold wrote:On August 06 2013 15:51 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:45 FallDownMarigold wrote:On August 06 2013 15:32 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:24 farvacola wrote:On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:On August 06 2013 14:27 Mallard86 wrote:If the gays would stfu then nobody would care one way or another but they have to force their lifestyle on popular culture which generates a disproportionate backlash. Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk. They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure. According to whom is that a fact? Most sociologists? Marriage between a man and woman has numerous tax benefits along with other benefits in insurance etc. There is a marked difference between western gay rights demands and other gay rights demands. In the west, the demand is that gays be eligible for marriage and other benefits. In other cultures there is the demand that gays not be beaten and executed or otherwise completely and utterly ostracized from the community. While both are different levels of discrimination, there is assuredly a difference between the two. At the very least, both come from traditional standards of social values. In the west, it is almost solely an argument over who should and should not receive financial and social benefits. Hes probably wondering who says this is a fact: "..The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer ..." It's kind of strange because surely some people still support gay rights due to wanting a more normal and non-discriminated lifestyle when stuff like this: http://www.khou.com/news/national/218451091.html clearly still happens to people. There are parts of the country where illegal segregation occurs. Yes, and the aim is to reduce occurrences of it, mainly involving education of ignorant people Thats nice but it is unrelated to the discussion of social engineering and the demands of the benefits of such by same sex couples. What social engineering? They want to access the same benefits that married couples do out of the principle of having genuine equality and not just being paid lip service to that effect. That's not what most people associate with the term.
Well i agree with most things Mallard86 says (not all though). When he says social engenerring, he probbaly means that most of benefits modern society offers to marriages are rooted in the past. In times when countries strived to have more and more citizens. Mostly in order to fight wars and boost inner consumption. For example in XIX century most european countries were desparate to boost their population growth beacuase they needed more and more people to fight their wars for them. High food production was already in place, so one thing they needed was to boost population growth. In order to achieve this a number of special benefits/ tax excpetion were introduced (less taxes for marriages/more children-less tax, a grants for families with lots of children etc). Social engineering at its finest. Those practices countinuued well into XX century, and are still used today. Though few people realize their roots. And their purpose.
PS. From that point of view granting same tax exception to homosexual couples as to stright ones is wrong (because it doesnt achieve the goal those exepction were introduced in the first place). We should devise another kind of incentives specialy for homosexuals (in order to boost their contribution to society). Though i dont think its possible to have different bonuses for hetero and homosexuals, not in courrent state of things. Some would thought of this as discrimiantion.
PS2. I am against tax exceptions for stright marriages anyway, because modern societies dont need to boost population growth. Hell we should lower it (in entire world).
PS3. A lot of modern social policies/engineering or however You want to call it, are done without clear goal in mind. They are often wrongly applied, missplaced, or serve more temporary popularity of politician rather than long term benfit of society as a whole.
|
On August 06 2013 19:28 Silvanel wrote:Show nested quote +On August 06 2013 16:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 06 2013 16:12 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 16:00 FallDownMarigold wrote:On August 06 2013 15:51 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:45 FallDownMarigold wrote:On August 06 2013 15:32 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 15:24 farvacola wrote:On August 06 2013 15:21 Mallard86 wrote:On August 06 2013 14:44 notwelldone wrote:
[quote]
Yeah, and what about them black guys generating disproportionate backlash by trying to have the same rights as us white folk.
They just need to shut up and everything will be ok. The whole Zimmerman trial crying by minority groups has generated far more backlash than good because there is so much unfounded crying.
Social engineering? Marriage historically is a human construct, period. Gargh.
Marriage in the US is a social engineering practice period. It is a ploy to construct man/woman families with their offspring raised by their biological parents. The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer but to tap into these social engineering benefits which have been put together by the government over the last century or so. Id just as soon see all marriage and family benefits abolished regardless of the family structure. According to whom is that a fact? Most sociologists? Marriage between a man and woman has numerous tax benefits along with other benefits in insurance etc. There is a marked difference between western gay rights demands and other gay rights demands. In the west, the demand is that gays be eligible for marriage and other benefits. In other cultures there is the demand that gays not be beaten and executed or otherwise completely and utterly ostracized from the community. While both are different levels of discrimination, there is assuredly a difference between the two. At the very least, both come from traditional standards of social values. In the west, it is almost solely an argument over who should and should not receive financial and social benefits. Hes probably wondering who says this is a fact: "..The fact is that gay "rights" of the last couple decades has nothing to do with allowing gays to live a lifestyle they prefer ..." It's kind of strange because surely some people still support gay rights due to wanting a more normal and non-discriminated lifestyle when stuff like this: http://www.khou.com/news/national/218451091.html clearly still happens to people. There are parts of the country where illegal segregation occurs. Yes, and the aim is to reduce occurrences of it, mainly involving education of ignorant people Thats nice but it is unrelated to the discussion of social engineering and the demands of the benefits of such by same sex couples. What social engineering? They want to access the same benefits that married couples do out of the principle of having genuine equality and not just being paid lip service to that effect. That's not what most people associate with the term. Well i agree with most things Mallard86 says (not all though). When he says social engenerring, he probbaly means that most of benefits modern society offers to marriages are rooted in the past. In times when countries strived to have more and more citizens. Mostly in order to fight wars and boost inner consumption. For example in XIX century most european countries were desparate to boost their population growth beacuase they needed more and more people to fight their wars for them. High food production was already in place, so one thing they needed was to boost population growth. In order to achieve this a number of special benefits/ tax excpetion were introduced (less taxes for marriages/more children-less tax, a grants for families with lots of children etc). Social engineering at its finest. Those practices countinuued well into XX century, and are still used today. Though few people realize their roots. And their purpose. PS. From that point of view granting same tax exception to homosexual couples as to stright ones is wrong (because it doesnt achieve the goal those exepction were introduced in the first place). We should devise another kind of incentives specialy for homosexuals (in order to boost their contribution to society). Though i dont think its possible to have different bonuses for hetero and homosexuals, not in courrent state of things. Some would thought of this as discrimiantion. PS2. I am against tax exceptions for stright marriages anyway, because modern societies dont need to boost population growth. Hell we should lower it (in entire world). PS3. A lot of modern social policies/engineering or however You want to call it, are done without clear goal in mind. They are often wrongly applied, missplaced, or serve more temporary popularity of politician rather than long term benfit of society as a whole.
Social engineering is kind of a weak construct to argue from since you can apply the name to every law ever made. If we are talking UK porn-filter and russian and gay-propaganda they are clearly targeted at moderating peoples behaviour and they are true social engineering constructs used to preserve something, a true conservative nanny state. When it comes to marriage it is far more vague.
Marriage as such seems like a construct to protect monogamic relations, which is completely independent of sexuality of those getting married. There is an argument of the church, but as such it is irrelevant to the civil construct around marriage.
In terms of the birth-incentivising construct: That may have been the original goal of the benefits, but it is no longer as crucial a concept since the times have changed and if you fear demographic problems, immigration is a solution but also artificial incemination and adoption are there as complementary tools and to some degree those types of population increases are independent of sexuality. While I can see the reason for scrapping all the benefits from marriage, the question is if their protection of monogamy makes it worthy on its own as a construct to keep? I would say that some of them may be.
|
Few years back polish governament introduced a grant to every couple-for every new-born child. Clearly they didnt got the memo. Russia situation is similiar, yet much worse. See for exmple here: http://www.ibtimes.com/russias-existential-crisis-no-signs-population-drop-will-end-214342
Remember this topic is about Russia. As i pointed before their rapidly shrinking population is one of the reasons behind those anti-homosexual policies. They prefere homosexuals to stay in the closet and create families (but with children).
Also immigration isnt really the same thing as population growth, it obviously depends on the outlook shared by countries elite. In Russia immigration isnt really viewed as something good. Its a threat. They want to combat it not encurage it. Remmber that these measures have suport of the vast majority of population.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
